You can dismiss the support request pop up for 4 weeks (28 days) if you want to be reminded again.
Or you can dismiss until our next donations drive (typically at the beginning of October).
Before you dismiss, please consider making a donation.
Thanks!

It is impossible, this argument claims, for any authoritative rationality (including an atheist's) to emerge from inchoate matter -- the existence of God must be assumed, therefore, in order to deny God's existence. In addition to the articles below, see also related Debates, Reviews, and Links. To purchase related reading, go to the Secular Web Book Store.

"In a recent paper . . . Michael Butler has attempted to defend the Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God (TAG) and refute the Transcendental Argument for the NonExistence of God (TANG). In this paper, Martin concludes that the only thing Butler has added to the discussion is that "it is impossible to go from factual claims to ethical claims-- in other words, that 'is' does not imply 'ought.' . . . The upshot of Butler's defense is that he has failed to defend TAG and refute TANG with respect to ethics."

Butler's article (published in the August 1996 issue of Penpoint, newsletter of the Southern California Center for Christian Studies), to which Martin responds, above. Among other assertions, Butler contends that "only the Christian worldview provides the necessary preconditions for the intelligibility of human experience."

Martin argues that TANG meets Butler's conditions for a transcendental argument. Moreover, even if it did not, Martin points out that Butler failed to show that TANG is an abortive attempt at an internal critique of the Christian worldview.